dont_log_me_out
No bio...
User ID: 686
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
Why would skin color make people have less children?
Why would collectivist ideals create less children when under collectivist ideals people work for society?
The legacy of communism never reached India or Singapore.
The Arab states were barely a few decades later than Europe, yet their fertility rate remained very high for a long time and only began to start declining to near replacement rates around the same point in time where they started attempting to culturally modernize.
Mexico is the most overworked country in the world and has a far higher fertility rate than the developed Asian nations.
Among commentaries by Japanese women, South Korean women, one of the primary reasons listed appears to be that they are required to focus both on their careers but also expected to live by very old traditionalist gender norms once they get married. This fits within my statement that modern industrialized and developed societies with traditionalist gender roles would see the greatest decline in fertility rates.
As far as I can tell the shoe I claim fits is fitting better than any of the shoes you have stated as alternatives.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
I think the decline in fertility below 2.1 (replacement rate) can be directly linked to modern day feminism and women's rights. However, what I have noticed is that rich female friendly nations do far better in terms of birth rate than rich conservative strict gender role societies.
For example - France has a fertility rate around 1.8. 1.7 for the US. Germany 1.4.
In the east with more strict gender norms the rich societies however have far more abysmal fertility rates - Japan 1.3, South Korea 0.8, Taiwan 1.1, Singapore 1.2.
Now one may argue that the decline in fertility rate is not due to feminism and women's emancipation but rather due to improvements in wealth of society. However, a counterpoint to this is that faster modernizing societies; in terms of becoming more feminist, tend to have declining fertility rates even when not wealthy nations.
Example- Nepal - 1.8, India - 2.0-2.1.
Based on the above data I would posit that feminist societies result in fertility rates declining to below replacement rates, but once a country is wealthy it is far worse for the population to remain conservative than for it to be a feminist nation due to the fact that conservative rich nations do far worse on population growth than feminist nations.
Conclusion - modern feminism doomed/ saved human civilization to constant steady population decline and that's the best case scenario for population demographics from all the options currently available.
Thoughts?
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
A man is not guilty without proof. Doesn't matter if the whole world thinks he cheated if he is on camera showing that he is playing a fair game.
There are only two theories left, anal vibrating beads, or previously knowing the prep game. Anal beads is almost certainly not the case. Previously knowing the prep game has a small chance but it would only be the case if someone from Magnus inner circle gave up the goods beforehand. If no mole is found in Magnus circle then we can assume that no cheating took place.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
You could try to invite the intellectual userbase of rdrama. That's how I ended up here. Some guy messaged me and told me I would be more appreciated here.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
I mean are the figures correct is a fair argument. Does Israel used the holocaust as a political weapon to defend it's actions is also a fair question. Did the holocaust occur at all is an unfair question. The top comment seems to fall within fair but misguided or very likely incorrect.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
but Japanese and South Koreans are fit still they do not reproduce more. They have worse wage stagnation in Japan.
Atomization makes sense to a degree.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
Any community I see with that as a mascot I would get an automatic instinct to bully.
I mostly jest but I think we need something more.....less cartoony.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
Thank you.
I read your article I enjoyed it.
Basically one is forced to face the truth when nothing else works, and too often, they would gladly deny it until such a moment occurs
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
I mean it's been more than a century and men are still trying to figure out whether it was a good idea to let women out of the kitchen. So the roots are definitely deep. Almost no culture in the world is considered sociologically matriarchal, so in majority cases the men are the decision makers so again that would bias the world view towards men as agents and women as inherently unagentic.
However there is another alternative system that does arise in certain cultural time periods. Generally during the warrior class in high levels of activity time periods. Such that often the men would go to war and the women would be the home care takers along with handling finances and the family business or their family part of the feudal estate. In these instances women are decision makers and are well versed in financial matters.
It is my belief that if industrialization had not taken place, then this would likely have been the final outcome of gender roles. A woman respected within her own sphere of influence as a well educated and skilled person but still within a societal expectation of her area of expertise being a woman's role.
So it would be akin to all men being soldiers, and all women being real estate agents as a firm rule or something along those lines separating certain skilled jobs as for women, and others for men, both being respected.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
I think the answer is right in front of our faces, let your kids eat dirt, or at the very least, it's okay to let them run outside right after the rain and get dirty in the mud.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
In a state, in order to pursue policy, you need state capacity, the capacity of the state of "doing things"
I disagree with your opening axiom.
In order to pursue policy, one must have the favor of the collective within that society, and that collective must be strong enough to implement their will over the system.
That is separate from the state as the state generally pertains to the bureaucratic organization that runs the state.
However we continue to have events such as mass protests, charitable organizations at the national level, or wealthy individuals independently capable of applying their own political beliefs within the system even without going through legal means to have them written as undeniable rights or laws within the system.
One can however argue in favor of your stance from the position that none of these organizations or groups would have the required stability to function and get things done without the state. But looking into history, when the state fails and another group emerges to take their place, then the new group in time becomes the defacto state equivalent.
In conclusion - your first axiom is incorrect. You do not need the state to pass policy. You must have the necessary power to implement what you desire in the system which can be through the state or without the state depending on how you go about it.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
Have we figured out robot hearts or lab grown hearts yet?
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
I expect less new fields getting revolutionized and more currently AI friendly fields getting huge upgrades.
Imagine call center AI that actually sounds fully human or AI assistants that sound fully human.
However, sticking to the spirit of your question, my answer would be mathematics. With Mathematicians only existing to reevaluate the solutions given by AI to confirm they would work. Mathematics would become far more an engineering field than a person coming up with a solution on their own field.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
I do not think so.
To rephrase your question, would you really be happy in a world where you were an exact copy of everyone else instead of such an existence evoking an existential horror of being part of a hive mind making you desire to act out to be visible in some way or form?
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
Not really no unless they are specifically speaking about jewish representation in the world or something specific to their culture each time which would make the podcast a weird boombox for the jews specifically. Beyond that if they are just talking about their work then their jewishness has nothing to do with it. Look at the details not the blanket view.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
Cross post: the_ivory_tower (rdrama.net) :
The limitations of humanity:
In the 21st century we saw the exponential scaling of human capabilities. Our ingenuity has led us down a path of a million miracles. The capacity to not just harness the resources around us but to go as far as to alter them and apply them to our purposes. On this design uniquely singular in it's extreme propensity in human beings, we have created entire civilizations, tech trees, ecologies, social systems, ideologies, none of which would have been possible in the past.
However even through the age of miracles and seemingly infinite growth one question persists, what if humanity is not infinite in its capacity, what if it's nowhere close to fulfilling a neverending greater purpose. What if we are just another branch on the tree of life that goes so far and nevermore?
Are we the greatest child of this Earth, or are we the harbingers of something greater, whether it be an elevated species other than ourselves, or an AI master race. Or perhaps, we are simply a dead end.
Today I write to you to discuss the slow downs in human society and the hurdles that lie ahead of us. The limitations of humanity:
-
The fatdemic. One of the greatest threats to the future of mankind. Every year the percentage of the world's population that becomes fat keeps rising. Till date there has been no reversal in the trends and it is likely that the only way to reverse it would be an authoritarian hand over the people's choices in food. With the abundance of food, as a species we have become weaker, stupider, more lethargic, with a higher propensity to heart disease and other comorbidities and an increased economic constraint over the system than is naturally deserved. In our fatness we have put ourselves in a position where we are almost regressing back in humanity's growth and potential. In our fatness is the clear cut sign of our lacking self control as a species.
-
The peaceful stupidity - It is said that some of the greatest inventions in the history of mankind come during times of war. Where the nation is put at risk and all resources are put into maximizing upgrades to ones technology or any capacity to beat the enemy. It was war that boosted the process of splitting the atom. It was the pressure of war that sent satellites into space. It was war that sent men to the moon long before they had any right to be there. That is not to say that there is no creation during a time of peace. Many things are invented during times of peace. Yet in the previous lines there is a symbolism which we see once again in the fact that in the most developed societies of the west we have now begun to see people get dumber over time. A society wide fall in overall IQ. A warning of the possibility of bad days ahead. Even a possible sign that we in the past century went way past the point of our natural capabilities and now find ourselves in a world that none of us understand.
-
The culture wars - There is utility in conflict. In an openly hostile setting where ideas come across each other, only the best survive. However, the 21st century appears to be way past that point of competing cultures and has instead fallen into a trap of trying to place equal value on all cultural systems. It is of course a polite impossibility. Our cultures define how we live our lives, how we live our lives defines the outcome of our lives. Then how can it be that all cultures are expected to provide equal results? It is a lie. However this is not the worst of it. We find ourselves in conflict with different systems of human life even when within nations themselves the ideas once again split apart along irreconcilable lines. We find ourselves fighting both within and without, but never breaking into open conflict. So now we are as animals forever drowning, falling further and further into the pitfalls of a culture warfare where there is no release, so we keep digging deeper and deeper, until all sanity and values that hold us to reality are lost on the path. The end product, the risk of it is simple enough, a collapse of society under it's own decadence without any release of the turmoil in time.
-
Loss of growing up - Imagine you are 10, you now find out that for your entire life you could keep being 10 years old and acting the part and life would still work out for you. Would you then take the hard path where you fall and get hurt and learn and change? Or would you rather remain the 10 year old that can watch cartoons till he is dead? In a society that is so deep in success that a man need no longer be forced to lift a single finger, the man seems to prefer the latter option. All growth is lost, because the man can subsist even remaining within his childish nature. Society is put at risk, for any group or individual or external entity that chooses to grow up or learn greater maturity is now in a position to take advantage of the naive and innocent, which is all that we are filled with now, the sheep flocks so huge there is no longer enough grass for them to graze, nor enough wolves left to lessen their numbers. A death by decay of the spirit.
-
Pace of progress - This one is the hardest to track of all the points made. However a simple way to think of it is this, a thousand years ago one man could revolutionize multiple fields, today it takes thousands of men to simply collate the data from the past. Often times the lack of progress is not even due to the information not being available, but the fact that two fields of science have their specialists never interact with each other. Which slows down progress as well due to all the relevant information not being available with the experts as the amount of information has far outpaced the amount of time available to a man to educate himself and even his intellectual capacity to collect all the data in the first place in a multidisciplinary way. Worse still, all the low fruit in inventions has already been picked up for the most part, so the only way to keep moving up is with higher effort with diminishing returns. Anyone who has taken an economics class knows how that graph looks, at some point those diminishing returns will always reach zero, and at that point either something new would be made to boost progress again or humanity will stagnate at that point.
Conclusion - The first four points regarding the fatdemic, lowering IQ's, the culture wars, and the loss of growing up when it is one of two or more options all display a limitation of our current cultural trends. As far as we have come, and as much cultural evolution as we have gone through, we find ourselves now faced with a wall that we are in this generation unable to overcome. Only time will tell how we surmount this obstacle and what the future after will look like, or if we even surmount these obstacles at all and haven't yet reached past a breaking point we do not yet recognize.
My final point as to the pace of progress primarily focuses on the increasing amount of time, energy, and education required to create new things to progress society. So far at the top of society, our capabilities at the top have kept up with the demands for further returns, the question that comes to mind is, with the failures of our current cultural peak, will we be able to keep progressing as a society? Already the soldier has fallen and military's see their numbers decline each year, if it could happen to the military, then why not the sciences in the years ahead?
Thank you.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
I mean the liberation of women as per modern standards is a very new event barely a century old in most nations of the world. So conservative can be safely used as a catch all term for ideologies that do not support women's liberation at the modern feminist range.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
The work culture of these territories has eased year on year though, yet the fertility rate has continued to decline, one possible answer may be that they simply haven't gone past the filter of ease of work that results in a population rebound.
My personal hypothesis based on living in the East is that for the longest time sexual mating pairings were based on family/ community approval, so in a more modernized society where children are no longer interested in their families selecting sexual mates for them, they have no reference point or experience of directly initiating sexual relations or long term interactions with the opposite sex on their own. Add on to this the fact that their moral claims of how the opposite gender is supposed to be appears to be almost childlike in its purity, most people when interacting with the other gender would be finding something far more repulsive than whatever ideal standard they have in their head, a problem that is becoming apparent even in western mating settings.
Mormons are a minority outlier similar to the Amish though. Haredi jews are poor or deeply religious groups within their communities.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
May I ask how long you would enjoy living in a society where year on year the economic decline from population loss is a net negative?
Would you be willing to support depopulation policies if you were informed 20 years from now it would see your income halve?
I ask this as a hypothetical ofcourse but I would be interested in your final response.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
My thoughts are that feminism began as a misguided quest to treat women like men
Disagree unless you mean be given the same basic rights as men. Then the same financial and social freedoms as men. Acting like men was a very 2010's thing.
then was adopted by bitter harridans and predatory men who realized the sexual revolution and increasing destruction of traditional mindsets would secure them steady supplies of consequence-free young pussy
Disagree. 1960's feminism had a whimsical quality to it which would have genuinely attracted many followers who wanted to see the world be a nicer place.
at the expense of the stability and health of our previous culture (a boon for the former).
There weren't enough harridans in that time period. Most incels actually came to be in recent decades only.
The goal of feminism is to let women be the type of men they've always hated. It's no surprise this suffocates fertility.
That appears to have been the trend of only the newest wave of feminism.
I believe you are making the mistake of taking current day attitudes and extending them through previous historical time periods to come to conclusions as to what they were about.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
Noted. I am guessing this is the equivalent of we like your ideas, but change your style as it's gonna get aggressively negative feedback.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
I am going to give very controversial opinions now. Tighten seatbelts:
-
The modern day social system allows women to be both too young to be responsibly in sexual relationships with older men till the age of 25 ( Leonardo di Caprio is blamed for ditching his 25 year old girlfriends even though he has been doing it often enough it's not even a surprise anymore. Zero expectation from people that the gf also chose to be with him knowing his history.)while also at the same time constantly claiming sexual maturity to make her own decisions when it suits her. So now as an adult male you start off with don't have sex with anyone younger than 18, but then the rules start changing to any woman younger than 25 is too young if you are an old man it's always going to be the equivalent of grooming, along with the fact that depending on who you are talking to at the moment the rule is being arbitrarily changed.
-
This shift in the social contract multiple times within a person's life makes them more likely to not even take previous social contracts seriously. The thought process can be they already keep trying to raise the social age of consent every year, maybe they were bullshitting about below 18 being too young as well. So now we have two groups of people trying to tear apart the sexual consent and individual responsibility social contract in opposite directions.
-
Based on this years data, it turns out that it is almost impossible to stop Gay men from having sex. Taking into account the sexual assault accusation and jailing rates for Trans women, it also appears that transwomen have an equal or even higher libido than gay men along with a far higher ratio of criminal records relating to sexual crimes. Within LGBT communities there also seems to be an unspoken rule about how they are far more loose with what the age of consent is supposed to be. All of these statements are based on my limited knowledge of the LGBT community over the years. I started out as a genuine ally by the way.
-
Trans people are the more extreme elements of the LGBT community which is already more loose with their rules and attitudes regarding the age of consent when compared to hetero groups. ( Supposedly). So it comes as little surprise that a noticeable segment of the trans community has no problem with sexualizing minors.
-
There is an additional element of transgerderism actually initially being about mental illnesses, along with the fact that transgender groups have a comparatively very high number of autistic people. Autistic people as per my knowledge are already pretty disconnected from general social norms, on top of that now they are going through additional mental health issues relating to gender identity, meanwhile having the libido of at the very least the average individual of their biological gender, while at the same time being at the bottom of the barrel in terms of who is willing to have sex with them. At the end of the day all these factors taken together should come as no surprise that a segment of trans women would be more than willing to get sex wherever they can and however they can irrespective of general legal and social norms of society around them.
In conclusion - Hide yo kids from the aunt with a dick unless you can at a very personal level 100% vouch for them.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
What WFH jobs are available to someone without a college degree, lacking work experience, from the third world and how do you go about finding them?
Thank you.
dont_log_me_out
1yr ago
AI is more likely to replace technical jobs than manual jobs though. It's easier to program an AI to figure out a trillion parameters of data then to teach it to walk. Welcome to the upside down where the safest job will be factory worker.
Said tongue in cheek.
I hope this doesn't detract too much from your message but I don't think the average Indian- American ( From India) at least first gen really cares that much whether there are enough Indian actors in Hollywood or not, they would be far more likely to ask you whether you can confirm or not that the police will come on time and keep the hooligans out ( Will likely mention the race of the "hooligans" as well because profiling is bad is a very 1st world concept.)
I feel mildly confident in my assessment that outside of blacks and whites, most minorities don't really care about culture wars once you guarantee them that their children will be given a chance at getting a better life than them.
More options
Context Copy link